I'm having doubts about the nature of tantra. Why is tantra not apart of Theravada Buddhism? I'm having doubts Buddha ever taught tantra. The fact tantra was first taught in Hinduism makes my doubts even stronger. How can a person prove tantra was or wasn't taught by Buddha? If this question goes against the TOS moderators please delete it.

The main reason there is no tantra in Theravada is because there is no mention of it whatsoever of it being taught in the suttas.

I don't believe the Buddhist taught tantra and I agree with you that it was imported from other Indian spiritual traditions, and superimposed over the Dhamma.

Metta,Retro.

If you have asked me of the origination of unease, then I shall explain it to you in accordance with my understanding: Whatever various forms of unease there are in the world, They originate founded in encumbering accumulation. (Pārāyanavagga)

Exalted in mind, just open and clearly aware, the recluse trained in the ways of the sages:One who is such, calmed and ever mindful, He has no sorrows! -- Udana IV, 7

davcuts wrote:I'm having doubts about the nature of tantra. Why is tantra not apart of Theravada Buddhism? I'm having doubts Buddha ever taught tantra. The fact tantra was first taught in Hinduism makes my doubts even stronger. How can a person prove tantra was or wasn't taught by Buddha? If this question goes against the TOS moderators please delete it.

Thanks,David

Hi David,There is no doubt in my mind that generation-stage components of modern tantras we have from Tibet (and their Indian precursors) were never taught by the Buddha. Everything in the suttas speaks against this. Buddha's approach is uncompromisingly direct, non-superstitious and experiential. He never advocates mantras, rituals or worship of any kind. There are good grounds for asserting that these components were imported from Hinduism.

That said, practices (we now call completion stage) and which later became incorporated into the corpus of ritualistic tantra have a long tradition in India and it would be naive to think that Buddha did not encounter them. In fact, I believe he did. I started a thread about the Mind-made Body, which you may wish to read, as it provides evidence from the Pali suttas of a practice which appears strikingly similar to the 'projection of consciousness' teachings of Naropa.viewtopic.php?f=24&t=191

What became of them is unknown, as there is no contemporary transmission of these teachings.

What I have never yet found are any parallels with completion stage tummo, or Inner Fire meditation. Although rapture and bliss get mentioned in various contexts within the suttas, they don't appear to have the same function of the 'great bliss' within Tibetan teachings. Tummo practice, it is claimed, uses resultant bliss as a basis for unbinding and to my knowledge, there is no such instruction anywhere within the Theravadan School.

I don't feel there is a simple answer to your question. If you are able to strip away all of the superstitious and ritualistic elements of tantra and look merely at the psycho-physical aspects, there may be grounds for investigation. I fear that this is virtually impossible to do, as feelings run high on this subject.

In terms of your own practice, I guess it's down to what works for you and not to what others may claim is best.

The writings of Theravada are meant for one thing -- getting one into right view and advancing one towards stream entry and eventually Arahanthood. Theravada establishes one in conviction like nothing else. The exposition is so precise, that all other doctrines pale in comparison.

ONE MUST HAVE A STRONG GROUNDING IN THERAVADA FOR ONE TO PROPERLY UNDERSTAND BUDDHA DHAMMA.

That being said...the Pali texts itself states that there are other teachings of the Buddha -- in other languages: Buddha is to have said the following:Mahaparinibbana Sutta of the Digha Nikaya:

There are various kinds of assemblies, O Ananda; assemblies of nobles, of Brahmans, of householders, of bhikkhus and of other beings.

When I used to enter an assembly, I always became, before I seated myself, in color like unto the color of my audience and in voice like unto their voice. I spoke unto them in their language and then with religious discourse, I instructed, quickened, and gladdened them.

But when I spoke, they knew me not and would say, Who may this be who thus speaks, a man or a god?

Then having instructed, quickened, and gladdened them with religious discourse, I would vanish away. But they knew me not, even when I vanished away

Buddha is said to have penetrated all Dharmas and knew well all religions and spoke to men/women in various languages in various realms in various worlds and countries-- this is the source of the Mahayana and Vajrayana (tantra).

An 3.8, Buddha extols Ananda over the skeptic Udayi when Ananda is awed and overwhelmed by the power of the Buddha, "Ananda had asked the Blessed One how far his voice would reach in the universe. The Lord had answered that the Enlightened Ones were immeasurable and could reach further than a thousandfold world system (with a thousand suns, a thousand heavens, and a thousand brahma worlds), even further than a three-thousandfold world system. They could penetrate all those worlds with their shining splendor and reach all beings living there with their voice.

As comment to AN 6:39, Nyanaponika Thera writes in "The Roots of Good and Evil" (p40-41).

In this text the Buddha implicitly rejects the maxim that "the end justifies the means" - a doctrine widely folowed in politics and sometimes even by religious institutions. Our text further declares as groundless the hope of those who apply this maxim in the belief that they will be rewarded in a future life for serving their cause by unrighteous means in this life, or in the case of non-religious application, that a future generation will reap the reward of the present violence and repression, in an ideal society or a "paradise on earth".

Our text further negates the notion that lustful passion, or actions usually regarded as immoral or sinful need not be obstacles to liberation or salvation and can even aid their attainment. Such ideas in varying formulations, have been mooted in Gnosticism, in medieval and later Christian heretical sects, in pre-Buddhist India, and in non-Buddhist and Buddhist tantra. The notion that the end justifies the means has also been expressed by such assertions as "Whatever is done with a view of doing good to the world is right or virtuous".

Metta,Retro.

If you have asked me of the origination of unease, then I shall explain it to you in accordance with my understanding: Whatever various forms of unease there are in the world, They originate founded in encumbering accumulation. (Pārāyanavagga)

Exalted in mind, just open and clearly aware, the recluse trained in the ways of the sages:One who is such, calmed and ever mindful, He has no sorrows! -- Udana IV, 7

I was taught tantra was taught by Buddha, but it was a secret teachings only passed along to a chosen few. If it was a secret then why was tantra introduced in Hinduism first? I'm not getting a clear answer. Vajrayana is all I know. I have had Highest Yoga Tantra empowerments, yet I still don't know why I'm supposed to take something disgusting and make it pure. For instance on another Buddhist website someone mentioned how a teacher instructed one of his students to steal a pair of panties from a prostitute, and then draw a picture of a holy image on it. In the back of my mind I'm thinking that is absurd. When I stated such I got a good lecture that I know nothing about Vajrayana. I must not because I can't comprehend stealing a prostitutes panties, for that matter ever visiting a prostitute to begin with.

Would a teacher who practices Theravada Buddhism ever advice one of his/her students to steal a pair of prostitutes panties, and draw a holy image onto them? I find it hard to believe Buddha would ever teach such a thing. I hope I don't come across as if I'm ridiculing tantra, because that is not my intention. I am questioning how authentic tantra is. At times it comes across as being created by some lonely lama who wanted to get busy with the ladies. Then there is another part of me that believes maybe objects of desire can be used to reach enlightenment. Maybe it comes down to a question of faith. Tantra could have been kept secret. But it seems that secret started in Hinduism. Which makes me wonder if tantra came from Hinduism all along. Much like the influence Bon had on Tibetan Buddhism, perhaps Hinduism did as well.

i thought it was just that the prajna paramita texts were hidden but that the tantric texts came from visions and other buddhas? oh well im sure it really doesnt matter on this forum anyways. but our texts do tell us that the buddha NEVER had secret teachings so i wonder why he would lie?

davcuts said: I was taught tantra was taught by Buddha, but it was a secret teachings only passed along to a chosen few.

The Buddha said that there were no secret teachings. Just think .... if, hundreds of years later and in another country, you wanted to add something to what the Buddha taught - what would be the easiest thing to do? All that could be said would be to say that the Arahants taught by the Buddha, who achieved enlightenment in his presence, were sort of second-rate - and those born hundreds of years later, in another country, and speaking a different language were somehow the superior ones, which the secret teachings were for. Then, later generations accepted this as fact. Sad.

The Buddha said:The Blessed One's Deadly Sickness27. At that time the Blessed One spoke to the bhikkhus, saying: "Go now, bhikkhus, and seek shelter anywhere in the neighborhood of Vesali where you are welcome, among acquaintances and friends, and there spend the rainy season. As for me, I shall spend the rainy season in this very place, in the village of Beluva.""So be it, O Lord," the bhikkhus said.28. But when the Blessed One had entered upon the rainy season, there arose in him a severe illness, and sharp and deadly pains came upon him. And the Blessed One endured them mindfully, clearly comprehending and unperturbed.29. Then it occurred to the Blessed One: "It would not be fitting if I came to my final passing away without addressing those who attended on me, without taking leave of the community of bhikkhus. Then let me suppress this illness by strength of will, resolve to maintain the life process, and live on."30. And the Blessed One suppressed the illness by strength of will, resolved to maintain the life process, and lived on. So it came about that the Blessed One's illness was allayed.31. And the Blessed One recovered from that illness; and soon after his recovery he came out from his dwelling place and sat down in the shade of the building, on a seat prepared for him. Then the Venerable Ananda approached the Blessed One, respectfully greeted him, and sitting down at one side, he spoke to the Blessed One, saying: "Fortunate it is for me, O Lord, to see the Blessed One at ease again! Fortunate it is for me, O Lord, to see the Blessed One recovered! For truly, Lord, when I saw the Blessed One's sickness it was as though my own body became weak as a creeper, every thing around became dim to me, and my senses failed me. Yet, Lord, I still had some little comfort in the thought that the Blessed One would not come to his final passing away until he had given some last instructions respecting the community of bhikkhus."32. Thus spoke the Venerable Ananda, but the Blessed One answered him, saying: "What more does the community of bhikkhus expect from me, Ananda?I have set forth the Dhamma without making any distinction of esoteric and exoteric doctrine; there is nothing, Ananda, with regard to the teachings that the Tathagata holds to the last with the closed fist of a teacher who keeps some things back. Whosoever may think that it is he who should lead the community of bhikkhus, or that the community depends upon him, it is such a one that would have to give last instructions respecting them. But, Ananda, the Tathagata has no such idea as that it is he who should lead the community of bhikkhus, or that the community depends upon him. So what instructions should he have to give respecting the community of bhikkhus?"Now I am frail, Ananda, old, aged, far gone in years. This is my eightieth year, and my life is spent. Even as an old cart, Ananda, is held together with much difficulty, so the body of the Tathagata is kept going only with supports. It is, Ananda, only when the Tathagata, disregarding external objects, with the cessation of certain feelings, attains to and abides in the signless concentration of mind, 19 that his body is more comfortable.33. "Therefore, Ananda, be islands unto yourselves, refuges unto yourselves, seeking no external refuge; with the Dhamma as your island, the Dhamma as your refuge, seeking no other refuge."And how, Ananda, is a bhikkhu an island unto himself, a refuge unto himself, seeking no external refuge; with the Dhamma as his island, the Dhamma as his refuge, seeking no other refuge?34. "When he dwells contemplating the body in the body, earnestly, clearly comprehending, and mindfully, after having overcome desire and sorrow in regard to the world; when he dwells contemplating feelings in feelings, the mind in the mind, and mental objects in mental objects, earnestly, clearly comprehending, and mindfully, after having overcome desire and sorrow in regard to the world, then, truly, he is an island unto himself, a refuge unto himself, seeking no external refuge; having the Dhamma as his island, the Dhamma as his refuge, seeking no other refuge.35. "Those bhikkhus of mine, Ananda, who now or after I am gone, abide as an island unto themselves, as a refuge unto themselves, seeking no other refuge; having the Dhamma as their island and refuge, seeking no other refuge: it is they who will become the highest, 20 if they have the desire to learn."http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .vaji.html

mettaChris

---The trouble is that you think you have time------Worry is the Interest, paid in advance, on a debt you may never owe------It's not what happens to you in life that is important ~ it's what you do with it ---

davcuts wrote:Would a teacher who practices Theravada Buddhism ever advice one of his/her students to steal a pair of prostitutes panties, and draw a holy image onto them?

I've never heard of a Theravada teacher advising anyone to do this. If any were to do so it would be blatantly at odds with the Buddha's teaching that stealing is an unwholesome act. There is simply no Pali text to which the teacher might appeal to give his advice any legitimacy. At the conclusion of a bhikkhu's ordination ceremony he will be exhorted not to steal even a blade of grass, let alone a prostitute's underwear.

By contrast, in the Mahayana (and a fortiori the Vajrayana) there is an elaborately developed ideology for the legitimizing of unwholesome conduct of almost every sort, to which any unscrupulous or perverted teacher might appeal. Its chief form is the doctrine of expedient means.

To get some idea of how radically the Mahayanists departed from the sīla of the Buddha's Buddhism you might be interested in the chapter on Mahayana ethics in Peter Harvey's An Introduction to Buddhist Ethics.

A couple of pages from Harvey's book:

1.jpg (301.94 KiB) Viewed 1786 times

2.jpg (275.54 KiB) Viewed 1788 times

Also of interest is Dza Patrul Rinpoche's Nine Considerations and Criteria for Benefiting Beings, wherein it is maintained that a (Mahayana) Bodhisattva may, and in some circumstances must, commit any of the ten akusala dhammas.

Best wishes,Dhammanando Bhikkhu

...and this thought arose in the mind of the Blessed One:“Who lives without reverence lives miserably.”— Uruvela Sutta, A.ii.20

It were endless to dispute upon everything that is disputable.— William Penn Some Fruits of Solitude,

I had never seen this kind of reasoning, that excuses breaking the percepts if one is enlightened enough... And it seems very odd to me.

In fact it seems to me to be contrary to the Buddha's teaching, how can a mind that has removed defilements through wisdom, commit acts that have ignorance, ill will or greed as their root?

Before I have found the Pali Canon I have drifted from New Age to Hinduism and Tibetan Buddhism. What made me keep looking, and not to settle down, was a lack of consistency that I sensed in some teachings. It was a great chock to discover that there was no record on the Pali Canon of the Buddha teaching Mantras or Tantras, and made lose interest in kundalini, chakras, auras and other phenomena that now seem irrelevant to the Noble Eightfold Path.

Interesting that the OP has brought this up... Why wonder that Buddhist Tantra is not found in the Pali Canon? Many things in the Mahayana/Tantra are not found in the Pali Canon or in the practices of Theravada, be it now or then.But I should add that it has not made the Mahayana or Tantra any less 'Buddhist' than what Theravada/Pali Canon is or has been. Respecting that this is a Theravada based Forum, I shall not flood this thread with numerous references to what Buddhist Tantra is or isn't.The answer is just that the Pali Canon/Theravada Buddhism contains nothing on it and hence...none...accept it and go on with life I do not see any point in using the Scriptures of one School/Tradition to prove the 'futility' of another or use lopsided references of the School/Tradition in question to show 'its futility' and turn it into another sectarian polemical of doctrinal purity or validity.The answer is: nothing in the Pali Canon or the Theravada Tradition contains anything on Tantra in text or practice. But, again, it is not one iota less 'Buddhist' in practice nor in text. Not sure if this is a proper place to debate this matter under 'Discovering Theravada' Similarly, if this may be inferred: don't expect a Hilton experience from a Fourseasons property. Rather, be rest assured that excellent service and the 'wow factor' is a guarantee from both. No amount of taking/insisting on SOP's or best practices of both hospitality properties is gonna fulfill an exclusive Hilton's or Fourseasons' guest. We can only and merely concede that both are the best in what they can do or offer but to demand/insist that Hilton conforms to Fourseasons or vice versa, won't that be a hilarious joke or disaster? At the end of the day, a guest gets his/her worth from either and when they have tried both and concede with what h/she wants, they will settle for the one that makes most sense or value without having to devalue or degrade the other 'unchosen' property.

thornbush wrote:Why wonder that Buddhist Tantra is not found in the Pali Canon?

Why not wonder?

Any newcomer to Buddhism who frequents Buddhist forums is sure to meet with claims (1) that the Pali Canon contains the earliest record of the Buddha's teaching and (2) that the Buddha taught the Mahayana sutras and tantras. So when s/he discovers that the latter are not to be found in the former, and indeed are frequently at odds with the former, it's natural that doubt will arise regarding the veracity of the second claim.

And as the Kalama Sutta states, it's proper to doubt in doubtful matters.

Best wishes,Dhammanando Bhikkhu

...and this thought arose in the mind of the Blessed One:“Who lives without reverence lives miserably.”— Uruvela Sutta, A.ii.20

It were endless to dispute upon everything that is disputable.— William Penn Some Fruits of Solitude,

I agree with with many of the Theravadins in that modern Mahayana and Vajrayana are grossly lacking in basic understanding of the 4 Noble Truths -- and are given this mantra or that mantra and empowerments without even understanding basic meditation and that precepts are mandatory in one's practice.

These "secret" teachings are not supposed to be secret -- they are advanced and NOT FOR BEGINNERS nor can they be understood by beginners.

Now because these guys aren't grounded in basic Buddhist teachings - I would doubt any teacher who tells me to go steal some prostitutes panties.

In that sense many of these Mahayana/Vajrayana practices are no different than Hinduism, because of this lack of understanding of basic Buddhism.

This is not the old time Mahayana of Nagarjuna or Ashvaghosha, all the old Mahayana schools had a sound and thorough grounding in the Aghama (Tipitika) texts and only then moved onto development of psychic powers through mantra/tantra. -- I have not heard of Ven.Nagarjuna or Ven. Ashvaghosha trying something that ridiculous.

Now I have provided plenty of evidence that the TIPITIKA NEVER states that the Tipitika is all that Buddha's taught -- he had taught throughout the world to different people in different languages and taught in different worlds as well.

And it is right to question and doubt any new teachings, especially a, ahem, teacher, who is teaching to steal someone's panties.

In the Mahaparinibbana Sutta, Buddha gives a manner of finding evidence if it is the Dhamma or not:

8-11. Then the Blessed One said: "In this fashion, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu might speak: 'Face to face with the Blessed One, brethren, I have heard and learned thus: This is the Dhamma and the Discipline, the Master's Dispensation'; or: 'In an abode of such and such a name lives a community with elders and a chief. Face to face with that community, I have heard and learned thus: This is the Dhamma and the Discipline, the Master's Dispensation'; or: 'In an abode of such and such a name live several bhikkhus who are elders, who are learned, who have accomplished their course, who are preservers of the Dhamma, the Discipline, and the Summaries. Face to face with those elders, I have heard and learned thus: This is the Dhamma and the Discipline, the Master's Dispensation'; or: 'In an abode of such and such a name lives a single bhikkhu who is an elder, who is learned, who has accomplished his course, who is a preserver of the Dhamma, the Discipline, and the Summaries. Face to face with that elder, I have heard and learned thus: This is the Dhamma and the Discipline, the Master's Dispensation.'

"In such a case, bhikkhus, the declaration of such a bhikkhu is neither to be received with approval nor with scorn. Without approval and without scorn, but carefully studying the sentences word by word, one should trace them in the Discourses and verify them by the Discipline. If they are neither traceable in the Discourses nor verifiable by the Discipline, one must conclude thus: 'Certainly, this is not the Blessed One's utterance; this has been misunderstood by that bhikkhu -- or by that community, or by those elders, or by that elder.' In that way, bhikkhus, you should reject it. But if the sentences concerned are traceable in the Discourses and verifiable by the Discipline, then one must conclude thus: 'Certainly, this is the Blessed One's utterance; this has been well understood by that bhikkhu -- or by that community, or by those elders, or by that elder.' And in that way, bhikkhus, you may accept it on the first, second, third, or fourth reference. These, bhikkhus, are the four great references for you to preserve."

Now this also brings into question comparatively new books such as the Abhidhamma, which is attributed to Ven. Sariputta who recieved it in heaven. How is the Abhidhamma to be verified? There are various Abhidhammas in various schools.

In this sutta the Buddha inflames the passions of the Bikkhu Nanda by showing him 500 extremely sexy Nymphs. Then he informes Nanda that these Nymphs can be had by him. Nanda then says he will follow the Buddha because the Buddha has guaranteed that Nanda will have these sexy Nymphs. Then in the course of practice Nanda feels shame at having practiced for such a purpose. His intense shame causes him to practice for the right reasons.

This is what I call "Skillful Means"

Obviously only a teacher who is profoundly skilled could expose a lustful celibate monk to 500 erotic temptresses and be doing it for his well being.

For something about the relationship between early Buddhism and Tantra see the final chapter of Richard Gombrich, "How Buddhism Began", where he hypothesises that Angulimala's finger necklace was actually some sort of tantric practise.

Thank you Gabriel and Mike for posts that provide relevant information rather than bigotry.

It is sad to see all that misinformation and accusations flying against a fellow school of Buddhism.

Although I am not a Tibetan Buddhist practitioner, the story of "prostitute's panties" is almost certainly bogus and just perpetrates this stereotype of "crazy wisdom" that "good Buddha-fearing folk" can used to justify their dismissal of Vajrayana as a degenerate and decadent perversion of Dhamma. From what I understand such "crazy wisdom" is almost non-existent in the tradition.

In fact every Tibetan teacher I've come across (not many granted) emphasised the Agamas as the foundation of any respectable Buddhist practice and taught that the tantras and various Tibetan teachings are either elaborations or skillful means to realise the teachings. But I am in no way qualified to be a spokesperson for Tibetan Buddhism - I practice Zen (Seon) Buddhism.

The bottom-line as I see it is if folks like to feel that "their" school is the "true" one or "the superior one" - go for it. You are building just another ego fortress.

Or we could just put that energy into being the best practitioner of Theravada/Vajrayana/Zen and not worry about slanging traditions that we understand so little about?

Or am I missing the point here?

_/|\_

Last edited by Dan74 on Tue Mar 03, 2009 8:41 am, edited 1 time in total.

Some peoples logic is tantra makes people see that both holy objects, and objects of disgust are empty of inherent existence. I can see how that is true, because everything in samsara deceives us into believing it is real, or "out there". But does that mean a person should view feces and gold as the same? If you eat feces isn't it still feces no matter how pure you make it. Most Buddhist I know are hardcore vegetarians, yet in their tantra practice they eat meat, saying they transferred it into emptiness. My thought is tell that to the cow who had it's throat slit at a slaughter house. Was it empty? Did it not suffer so someone could use it's flesh in a religious ceremony?

I hope I'm not angering anyone with my doubts about tantra. Some have already pointed out I'm not supposed to make people lose faith in tantra, because I have had HYT empowerments. It seems I'm supposed to keep my doubts to myself, or I might take rebirth in a vajra hell.Vajrayana is all I know. Some of you know I got involved with Buddhism through a cult. I have spoke out against that cult to the point they felt it was necessary to put my name and picture on one of their websites. People have threaten me saying I may go missing one day, so I need to make sure my affairs are in order. It's not a direct threat, but a threat just the same. I would be lying if I said I wasn't scared. All my teacher would have to do is give the order for me to be killed, and it will be done. That's because people view him as a Buddha or Bodhisattva. He knows best in their eyes. Am I to take it there are no such beliefs in Theravada Buddhism? It seems killing and sexual misconduct can be seen as pure in Tibetan Buddhism. I still don't see how that is possible. I have a lot of guilt for feeling this way.